DVDActive uses cookies to remember your actions, such as your answer in the poll. Cookies are
also used by third-parties for statistics, social media and advertising. By using this website, it is
assumed that you agree to this.

Avatar Preview

Marcus takes a short trip to Pandora and intends on spending Xmas there too...

It’s rare for a whole day to be dedicated to the release of a forthcoming movie. I know that personally I can allocate a title to a day just because the first trailer hits or the movie hits the cinema, but for a filmmaker to do it somehow makes it feel important. And when that filmmaker is James Cameron and he’s been away from the big screen for twelve years (beside some of his documentary work anyway), the event ramps up from important to outright exciting.

Having seen the trailer (many times) the day before, I went along to the preview screening with high expectations. Sitting down with friends and putting our 3D glasses on I suddenly got that wave of excitement that only comes with movies you’re itching to see. The Twentieth Century Fox rep did a bit of an intro, making sure that we weren’t filming with our mobile phones and asking us to feedback what we thought about it afterwards. So here we go... my first impressions of Avatar.

Starting with James Cameron's introduction, in which he lets us know about Avatar Day and how this collection of scenes are all from the first half of the movie and will be spoiler free, he gives us a brief overview of the setting. Telling us about how Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) has been brought to the alien planet Pandora and that it’s as beautiful is it is deadly.

New arrivals to Pandora are sitting in a large canteen type room. Silver benches and tables are all lined up and cool scar dude from trailer, Col. Quaritch (Stephen Lang), tells the newbies that as head of security it’s up to him to make sure none of them die. He also mentions the Na'vi, the humanoid species who inhabit the planet, and then points outside of the armoured windows and explains how compared to Pandora, Hell is a holiday resort. Jake Sully arrives late in his wheelchair. This had a nice familiar Aliens/Colonial Marines feel to it and was a great place to start. As for the look of the scene, it was bright, sun-lit and clean. The 3D put you in the room with the crowd (which included Joel Moore from Dodgeball) and this was a fine human start to proceedings.

Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver) puts Jake in a contraption that looks like an MRI or CTI machine (or for the True Blood fans out there, Vampire Bill’s travel coffin). He drags his own legs up refusing her help and seems to have a bit of an ‘I’ll do it myself’ attitude. Having Sigourney on James Cameron mode again was a delight and I’m surprised she wasn’t featured in the trailer, as the pairing of Sigourney and Jimmy C again is proper fanboy exciting. Maybe next time. Also the depth of machine's entrance, in which Jake’s little pod is going to travel down, had some crazy-effective 3D.

Scientists on cool see-through computer screens (which again looked amazing in 3D) monitor his brain patterns and if those visuals weren’t cool enough, when the scientist drags the info onto a handheld monitor it just gets cooler. Jake’s brain pattern gets transferred into a Na'vi and Sigourney takes off her lab coat and says that she's going into hers too.

Jake wakes up in the Na'vi body. Scientist/Doctors look down on him and then to check responses click their fingers next to his ears. This totally sells the scale of the Na'vi. Some twelve foot plus blue alien looking photo-realistic next to the human scientist was very effective. As in the trailer, the textures and details in the feet and hands of this thing were astonishingly real and some of Jake's mannerisms in the new body were very subtle. More so was Joel Moore’s character (who IMDb is listing as Norm Spellman (as Joel David Moore) whatever that means) waking up in his Na'vi body on the next bed and is told by the doctors to touch his fore finger to his thumb to check responses. That felt very real, even coming from a giant blue alien.

Anyway, Jake sits up and looks happy that he can use his legs in the new body. The scientists keep telling him to take it easy but then he’s up on his feet fighting to balance and with a strategically placed tail we avoid seeing his ass crack. He wobbles a bit and then hits the window delivering the only line in the trailer ‘This is great’ and as he stumbles out of the room, with the scientists panicking, I began to get the sensation that this really was.

Now we jump into full CGI in a jungle setting. Jake in Na'vi form is with the other Na'vi avatars of Dr. Grace Augustine and Norm Spellman. The CG work for Sigourney’s character here really struck a cord. She’s blue, has a head band, making her look slightly hippy-ish, and despite being a CG alien, the subtle reflections of Sigourney’s own features were beautifully captured.

Jake has a gun on a creature best described as a triceratops with a hammerhead shark head. Dr. Augustine is telling him not to shoot, but to stand his ground. The depth of the jungle in 3D was nuts and little details, such as small insects disturbed when the beast moved through the foliage was incredibly effective.

Anyway Jake stands his ground and the big beastie runs away. Jake gets all cocky and shouts stuff like ‘Yeah, you’d better run bitch’ and ‘Next time bring your friends’, only to have a bigger beastie, which I believe is called the Thanator (the big, mean roaring beastie from the trailer) slowly creep up from behind and then pounce at Jake. A chase begins, smashing through Bamboo-esq trees and claws barely missing Jake as he ducks and weaves through the debris. He finds his way under the roots of a large tree and unleashes his machine gun at the Thanator, they seem to hit it and it moves strategically to the right to avoid and then sneaks in for another attack, smashing the roots next to Jake. The scene felt pretty damn exciting, with plenty going on, and once again the 3D quality to it really added another level on enjoyment.

Jake is alone at night having problems with some more of Pandora’s deadly creatures. You briefly see a glimpse of this in the teaser trailer where he swings the fire torch at some dog sized beasts that in the short flashes look a little like the chestburster that came from the Rottweiler in Alien 3.

Saving Jake with a few arrows all while doing a cool slow motion jump comes Neytiri (Zoe Saldana) a native Na'vi (who, I assume isn’t an Avatar for a human counterpart). She scares off the dog like beasties and even puts one of the injured ones out of its misery with a subtle touching sadness. Jake is all hyper and thankful for the save but Neytiri gives him shit about his involvement in the situation claiming that it’s his fault these deaths had to happen because of his stumbling through the forest without a care.

Neytiri is by far the most impressive CG character on offer here (and potentially ever), for sheer level of detail and also proves to be a thoroughly believable and likable character. She is a fine mix of beauty, fierceness and sadness and there’s so much going on in the performance, with her twitching and emotive eyes, she’s impossible not to be enthralled with.

Scene five seems to take place a few moments after scene four and we see Jake and Neytiri walk deeper into the forest. They are surrounded with fluorescent plants and flowers and the depth in the 3D as well as the overwhelming glowing colour in the foliage was very impressive.

Jake now seems to have joined the native Na'vi, with no clothes as such and lots of new markings painted on his body. He edges along the side of a waterfall with the other Na’vi in tow and Neytiri is explaining that he will know when he’s been chosen. We see what might choose him when they turn the corner and there's a whole pack of dragon type beasts sitting on the cliff edge.

Jake wanders over, with Neytiri watching as the dragons start to hiss and fly away. That is until one stands its ground and turns to face Jake. Jake hisses at it (as per the screenshot from the trailer) and the dragon hisses back. Jake's been chosen.

Jake hops on top of the dragon and starts to wrestle with it. Think Cowboys/Indians trying to break in a horse. It head buts him and struggles but Jake perseveres and soon gets it on the ground. Neytiri tells him to make the connection now. Jake grabs his long ponytail and holds it next to one of the dragon’s antennae, the strands within both weave together and all of a sudden the dragon calms down with Jake on its back. Neytiri says that the first flight has to happen now and leads the dragon off of the cliff. Jake and the beast drop and Jake seems to be able to control it with his mind (after a bit of clumsy practice). It has to be said at this stage in blockbuster cinema the problematic effect of having a humanoid form on the back of a beastie has always looked pretty shoddy from Star Wars to Lord Of The Rings they've all failed, but here it looks fantastic and totally works.

Finally we slip into an extended trailer with more scenes of the battles the movie has to offer and little extensions to what was seen in the trailer. Explosions, more marine stuff (which sadly wasn’t featured more in the preview) and plenty to sell Avatar as one of the must see movies of 2009.

As someone who has been following James Cameron’s new project with much anticipation ever since rumblings of it first began, I was happy that I got to see this preview footage (which ran about seventeen minutes with the introduction) twice.

I found the teaser trailer to be great though not mind blowing but with the fifteen minute preview (which in all honesty the trailer seemed to be teasing) my first experience with Avatar was a good one. The CGI on first look is staggering, especially on the big screen. The subtle character traits in the animation are top notch and very, very realistic (especially for Neytiri) and James Cameron’s Pandora looks to be a world full of wonders.

On a slightly more negative side, I have to admit some of the full CGI shots had me slightly disconnected from accepting this as anything beyond a very, very, very high end animated movie as opposed to a live action one. The Na’vi look incredibly real, but beyond key moments I kept having to remind myself this wasn’t an animated movie but something creating the illusion of reality. The one scene in the preview that crossed over the animated characters with the live action counterparts worked wonders though and I’m sure that the full movie with more interactions like this will sell the illusion of the fully animated scenes with ease.

I was left wanting to see much more from Avatar. I can’t wait to see long scenes of the military, with all those mecha-suits and hover-ships; they look like they could really bring some incredible visuals. I of course want more of a feel for the story as the teaser trailer and preview have only really hinted at moments (and those moments conjure comparisons with 10,000 B.C., Dances with Wolves and of course Star Wars, while always remaining something new at the same time). Beyond Neytiri and the excitement of seeing Sigourney in another James Cameron movie, I didn't get the chance to warm to many of the characters. I felt Jake came off as a little too typical as the smart mouthed guy on his way to making good by movies end, sort of like a Disney hero, Jim Hawkins from Treasure Planet came to mind in fact.

Overall, I’m in for the Avatar trip. Those blue aliens have won me over with their Nightcrawler/Kaminoan good looks, the action looks top notch, the effects look like they could set a new standard come December (if they haven’t already) and the 3D brought a whole new feeling to the scale for this sort of movie. I’m ready for Avatar and Jimmy C’s return to cinema after a hiatus which has seemed like forever. Basically, what I've seen here is enough to make the wait for the December 18th release date unbearable. ‘This is great!’

Advertisements

Comments

Reply

Message

Enter the message here then press submit. The username, password and message are required. Please make the message constructive, you are fully responsible for the legality of anything you contribute. Terms & conditions apply.

Sam Spade wrote: leigh1975 wrote: The nature of Hollywood sceptics, and the mainstream critics in general, will take into consideration the fact that Titanic was the highest grossing film of all time and knock Cameron off of his perch by giving the film a critical savaging in order for it to bomb and have 'balance' restored. Yes people, Hollywood IS that fickle, and yes it has been done before. It really doesn't matter how good Avatar is.

Not to mention the pre judging opinions in here before even seeing a theatrical trailer even. Not even the film itself.

Pre-judging is how you decide whether or not to buy a $10 ticket. Everyone who is gushing about the teaser footage is pre-judging as well. Certainly that folk hasn't seen a theatrical trailer - should they not be able to formulate an opinion as well? Just because some people view such footage and don't agree that it looks like it's going to be a revolutionary masterpiece like it has been hyped to be doesn't invalidate their opinion nor does it necessarily suggest that everyone thinks the movie itself is poor.

The footage released so far has yet to truly impress me. It's not because Titanic did well financially - I fail to see how its success is going to turn the world against Avatar. It surely has large shoes to fill, but the fact that James Cameron is behind the wheel certainly excites and assures critics and moviegoers like myself.

leigh1975 wrote: The nature of Hollywood sceptics, and the mainstream critics in general, will take into consideration the fact that Titanic was the highest grossing film of all time and knock Cameron off of his perch by giving the film a critical savaging in order for it to bomb and have 'balance' restored. Yes people, Hollywood IS that fickle, and yes it has been done before. It really doesn't matter how good Avatar is.

Not to mention the pre judging opinions in here before even seeing a theatrical trailer even. Not even the film itself.

m@tt wrote: I was gonna post this, lol. The hollywood opiate of putting technology before story. Kind of reminds me of Peter Jackson's King Kong and to a degree The Rings trilogy. Still think Cameron is yet to top Aliens and the first Terminator.

I dunno, I thought Kong was a pretty good mix of both to be honest. Though I could have done without the dino stampede with Jamie Bell running on a treadmill.

I was gonna post this, lol. The hollywood opiate of putting technology before story. Kind of reminds me of Peter Jackson's King Kong and to a degree The Rings trilogy. Still think Cameron is yet to top Aliens and the first Terminator.

Sam Spade wrote: The whole 3D thing does nothing for me, considering I've never seen a 3D film, cannot see in 3D with those silly glasses and still need to see an IMAX film.

How can you say 3D does nothing for you when you haven't seen a 3D film. The Final Destination was the same story and lameness as the last 3, but the 3D was freaking amazing! I have never seen a better 3D film in my life. The technology is way better now than the Captain Eo or Honey I Shrunk the Audience. It blew me away which was surprising as the story was poop.

When I heard that they were making an Avatar movie, I was really excited. I thought they meant Avatar : The Last Air Bender.....but no. We get this CGI garbage. Don't get me wrong. I like CGI....as long as you can't tell that it's CGI. I completely am against CGI for CGI sake. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean that you should do that thing. Oh, and Gildia, not every film nerd is going to see this. I'm not. Nor will any real movie fan.....of any genre.

The nature of Hollywood sceptics, and the mainstream critics in general, will take into consideration the fact that Titanic was the highest grossing film of all time and knock Cameron off of his perch by giving the film a critical savaging in order for it to bomb and have 'balance' restored. Yes people, Hollywood IS that fickle, and yes it has been done before. It really doesn't matter how good Avatar is.

FrankTheTank wrote: videoprebo wrote: and if you all think you can make it better.... then make a movie by yourself.

I personally hate Beowulf and the Polar piece of C"·$ap, but this one looks watchable enough

Again, that's a really weak argument. I don't have to be a director/actor/screenwriter/etc to recogize a bad movie from a good movie. You just said that you hate Beowulf and Polar Express. According to your argument, you should go make a film that's better than those two films. You see, it doesn't work both ways.

Like I said, I'm still going to be seeing this probably, I'm just sorely disappointed with the previews that I've seen given the scope and technology of the filmmaking process.

Never had a problem with Titanic. I think it's a perfectly paced, perfectly effective movie. It has its issues but never any that I consider make it a bad movie.

Pixarfan517 wrote: if there's one movie that I would rather save up my money for this Holiday season, it'll have to be "Sherlock Holmes."

My money's on Where The Wild Things Are. Now that looks like a perfect blend of techniques.

Sam Spade wrote: Take Lucas for instance, he over uses CGI and completely forgets about the most important thing of all... Story.

I agree, he can sometimes over complicate things with CG. (trooper costumes in Sith??) but he's not the prime example for forgetting story. Compared to most CG heavy movies that hit our screens, Lucas should be commended.

Worst Nightmare wrote: I wonder if this movie will be too far ahead of its time?

I bet we have another T2 / Jurassic park scenario and the NEXT big movie to use the super duper advances in tech will get all of the credit for being the break through movie. Which means Tintin with probably steal Avatar's thunder.

FrankTheTank wrote: Chris Gould wrote: Might be worth actually watching it first before dismissing it as s**t.

This statement is incredibly two-sided, though. Would someone say that to G-Force, Dance Movie, etc? I can see why it's said here, because it's a James Cameron film that has supposed revolutionary CGI, but opinions can be formed based on what has been seen in trailers.

Exactly. I never understand why anyone would say a ridiculous statement like that to get the haters off. Haters are gonna hate just like the lovers are gonna love, So just let someone have their own damn opinion already!

I mean, I don't mind this particular Avatar just as long as it's not related to the Nickelodeon cartoon. The sci-fi looks believable but a bit weird but other than that, if there's one movie that I would rather save up my money for this Holiday season, it'll have to be "Sherlock Holmes."

Look Computer Generated Imagery is the future of cinema. The problem is directors do not know how to use CGI creatively in their films. Take Lucas for instance, he over uses CGI and completely forgets about the most important thing of all... Story. He also edited scenes completely in post production using CGI which shows he did not plan enough. CGI can be used efficiently too. Take District 9 for example, it's a sci fi film yet you believe everything that happens because everything is not CGI and the alien characters are more human than the human characters due to fantastic writing. CGI is a tool like anything else, has come a long way and will continue to be used in new ways.

Jumping to conclusions about films after seeing a teaser trailer is just silly. Especially considering the fact that this is a James Cameron film with a new take on a classic story. This is not a generic studio movie people.

videoprebo wrote: and if you all think you can make it better.... then make a movie by yourself.

I personally hate Beowulf and the Polar piece of C"·$ap, but this one looks watchable enough

Again, that's a really weak argument. I don't have to be a director/actor/screenwriter/etc to recogize a bad movie from a good movie. You just said that you hate Beowulf and Polar Express. According to your argument, you should go make a film that's better than those two films. You see, it doesn't work both ways.

Like I said, I'm still going to be seeing this probably, I'm just sorely disappointed with the previews that I've seen given the scope and technology of the filmmaking process.

The point of a preview is to give you an impression of what is to come. There is nothing wrong with formulating an opinion based on a trailer. I think the problem is saying that something IS garbage opposed to saying that it looks like garbage.

My faith in this movie lies entirely on James Cameron's reputation. Right now this looks like it could be a sweet action movie, and that is about all I've taken away from it. I didn't attend Avatar Day, but the teaser left me pretty indifferent.

What makes CGI work (for me) isn't how much money or technology you cram into it. It's all about design. These ugly blue things don't have it. No matter how photo-realistic you get them, they just don't look cool to me. I'm still giving Cameron the benefit of the doubt though, and I'll still see it opening weekend hoping that good action scenes and a good plot win me over where the design does not.

Chris Gould wrote: Might be worth actually watching it first before dismissing it as s**t.

This statement is incredibly two-sided, though. Would someone say that to G-Force, Dance Movie, etc? I can see why it's said here, because it's a James Cameron film that has supposed revolutionary CGI, but opinions can be formed based on what has been seen in trailers.

I wasn't able to attend Avatar Day, so I can't base my opinions on the 3-D aspect, but the teaser trailer did disappoint quite a bit. I'll more than likely be there on opening day, granted reviews are strong, but I have to say that the trailer didn't boast anything new. The fact that the film was hyped to be the masterpiece that will change filmmaking forever looks to be rather overblown. Again, I could be proven wrong come December 18th, and it's not exactly Cameron's fault that everything was overhyped...it just seems like media oversaturation.

I'm slightly worried because of c**p like Indy 4 and the Star Wars movies, but I think Cameron can still make a great movie. And I love the casting, I thought Sam Worthington was great in Terminator. I'm definitely looking forward to it, but I'm a little cautious.

Marcus1138 wrote: ...if the aim is to end up with fully CG'd movies imitating real life, I really don't get the point. ...when does it just become an animated movie? ...why is it that I love movies with CG elements and I love animated movies, yet the line where they cross over I'm shakey on?

I couldn't have said it better. I feel exactly the same way.

Heck, The Incredibles is one of my favourite movies. I'm not against CGI, not at all. I think another great live-action film that utilised CGI perfectly was T2. Also, Sin City was the perfect utilisation of digital technology. Never once did it feel gratuitous. It's that crossover area that troubles me. When live-action film makers try to recreate EVERYTHING in the computer, that's when they lose me.

Marcus, I can understand your faith in Cameron, but ever since The Phantom Menace, I've been disappointed too many times to share it.

In fact, what a disappointing year this year has been. Star Trek has been the only blockbuster I've enjoyed so far.

I agree with thedaz on a few points there, however as always it comes down to the story and I'm hoping Avatar is just as great as all of Jimmy's other movies.

As for the tech debate, Polar Express and Beowulf's motion capture stylings really don't do anything for me (dead eyed weirdness) but both are fine movies. In fact Beowulf may very well not have worked any other way because theres something about the overall style that sells it...for me at least.

I sort of respect what filmmakers are doing in regards to the tech behind it all but if the aim is to end up with fully CG'd movies imitating real life, I really don't get the point. I love the work on Jar Jar Binks and many other CG characters but when does it just become an animated movie? and why is it that I love movies with CG elements and I love animated movies, yet the line where they cross over I'm shakey on?

At the end of the day, the Avatar trailer could have been a black screen with the words "The New James Cameron movie arrives in December" and I probably would have been just as excited. I think the guy's done enough in cinema to deserve a little faith, even if many are luke warm to the trailer and aren't sure where he's taking us. Remember, this isn't just another CG popcorn movie, this is a James Cameron movie and seemingly he's not pissing about.

I tell you the one I'm most dubious about at this stage; Tintin. I really don't get the angle on this one and am needing a big old slice on convincing that the'Berg and Jackson's way, is the right way.

thedaz wrote: As a huge James Cameron fan, I'm trying to stay positive. But I fear a bomb will land on December 18.

I agree with that sentiment. I think this film looks awesome and every film nerd will see this, but unfortunately the majority of the American audience doesn't understand or care about this type of film. And I'm not talking about the genre, I'm talking about the technology used in making the film. They won't understand why the film is awesome, they'll just look at the ticket price and refuse to see it (the ticket price will probably be higher if it's in 3D and in IMAX.) So while film fanatics, like the editors and members of this site, will rush out to see it I doubt it'll bring in Joe the Plumber or Mary Main Street or whatever the term for average Americans is these days.

Why are so many directors (Lucas, Zemeckis and now Spielberg, Jackson and Cameron) so obsessed with CGI and motion capture?

They all proclaim it's the future of cinema. Blah, blah, blah.

Well... If that's the future of cinema, count me out.

Guess what? It isn't. Most people don't like it. I for one, certainly don't. If I want to see a CG feature, I'll go watch Pixar's latest. Those guys know how to do it right. What they do is create a stylised world and they get the cartoon/reality balance just right.

Why get computers to attempt to re-create reality and actors? I don't understand the obsession. Every frame of the Avatar teaser looked like c**p to me. In fact, most of the shots looked like a better than average animated feature, that's all.

I saw little to no originality on display. The live action footage looked like a glossy Aliens rip off and the Na'vi are surprisingly uninspired. They look like goofy, tall, blue Gelflings from The Dark Crystal. Where's the creativity?

Why I've always loved James Cameron is that most of his films have an earthy, gritty reality to them. He appears to have abandoned that aesthetic and made Mulan meets The Little Mermaid.

I saw both Final Fantasy and Beowulf in a cinema. While on some levels I thought it was kinda cool, ultimately, so-called photo-realistic CGI just creeps me out. The illusion never quite comes off. I still think one of the best films to utilise CGI was Jurassic Park. It was used to enhance the reality of a scene, and only used when it absolutely had to be. When CGI becomes all or most of what's on screen, any sense of perceived reality is greatly diminished.

Sadly, the Avatar footage seemed to follow this pattern all too often.

As a huge James Cameron fan, I'm trying to stay positive. But I fear a bomb will land on December 18.

The teaser actually got me excited and I have not been following the hype or start believing it until I saw the teaser. Looks like James Cameron is on top of his game. Cannot wait! Space Marines, Indigenous Aliens and two star crossed lovers from different worlds literally. In other words this is going to be a great story. Visually this film looks epic too. The whole 3D thing does nothing for me, considering I've never seen a 3D film, cannot see in 3D with those silly glasses and still need to see an IMAX film.

I too saw the preview (twice) and was totally convinced. I would say this is something totally new and if you are someone who visits this site then you are someone who should be excited to see this film. Preferably in 3D theatres where the work can be appreciated fully.